Questions about Freeh report
Published: Sunday, February 17, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
Updated: Wednesday, February 20, 2013
I read Dejan Kovacevic's sports column “Kovacevic: The Paternos' sad, squeaky reply” (Feb. 11) regarding the Paterno family's report. I have some questions for him.
Why does he think Mr. Freeh is right about Mr. Paterno when he was so wrong in the fiascos of Waco, Ruby Ridge, Wen Ho Lee, Richard Jewell and numerous others? As Charles R. Smith wrote for Newsmax.com in 2002, Freeh “oversaw the longest run of FBI public disasters in its entire history.”
The Penn State trustees knew where to get the report they needed. Why didn't they conduct a thorough analysis of the Freeh report before accepting it? Why were they so anxious to put this behind them? What were the true motives of some trustees?
Why did the Penn State president accept the outrageous NCAA sanctions without question? Please don't tell me it was because he was worried about the “death penalty.” NCAA President Mark Emmert and NCAA Executive Committee Chair Ed Ray each gave different answers regarding the fact that the “death penalty” was on the table, and that has never been explained.
I would appreciate getting answers to these questions, which no one wants to address.
- Sacrament, not style
- ObamaCare in action
- Multiple Bibles: It’s OK
- Public will win
- Unions can, churches can’t?
- Belongs in prison
- Faulty mindset
You must be signed in to add comments
To comment, click the Sign in or sign up at the very top of this page.
Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.